The Mythology of Money

The Mythology of Money

You learn the myth at a young age and it is continually reinforced on your consciousness for the rest of your life. It is the background illusion that makes day to day existence possible. It is the story that holds up the system. They teach it in school and on television and in the movies. If you do not believe the story, they will say you are crazy. Atheists don’t believe in God, but they believe in the myth. What is the myth? Money is a real thing.

Yeah, well, so is God… sort of… metaphorically speaking. The belief in God was real enough to serve as the foundational principle of an economic system that lasted for hundreds of years. Religion was the glue that held the economy together. Nowadays, the belief in God is optional. Instead, the belief in the reality of money is the foundational principle of the economic system. The myth of money is the glue that holds the modern economy together.

According to the myth, money is a thing out there in the world that humans can gather or collect or earn or find. Some people or institutions have lots of it, some people have smaller amounts and some people have very little or none. The story, however, is a little vague in explaining how people ended up with the money that they have now. Some people suggest that the present distribution of money is the result of evolution (they earned it in the great competition) while others suggest that it is the result of God’s plan or design. Really though, they tend to avoid the topic all together. You cannot even mention it in polite society. You can, of course, argue until you are blue in the face about the re-distribution of money. Liberal vs. conservative…. But you can’t talk about the distribution of money in the first place. We are just supposed to accept the reality that there are trillions and trillions of these things out there called money and some people and institutions have it and some don’t. That is just the way it is. You better believe it.

But what if you don’t? What if you don’t believe the myth about money but instead understand the truth about money.

In reality, money is the symbolic representation of your legal right to use economic value within the jurisdiction of the government that backs the money. In a democratic society, the value of money would be determined by an agreement between citizens. In other words, money is part of a social contract and it is used as a tool to facilitate the exchange of goods and services. As such, all citizens have access to the flow of money based upon the same basic formula. But I do not believe any such democratic society exists anywhere on earth. Instead what we have is oligarchic money supply systems. Money is used as a weapon to enslave the masses instead of as a tool to facilitate fair trade.

The same structure is used by nation states all around the world. It was originally designed by the Roman Empire and was modified by the Europeans but it is now the Americans taking the lead in spreading it world wide. It is THE mechanism that allows for the domination of indigenous local cultures by the global corporate culture.

Every nation state has an evolving amount of economic value available within its borders. In other words, old economic value gets used while new economic value is created. The distribution of money determines who gets to use the economic value that is available. A central authority controls the money supply. Theoretically, they add new money to the system by investing in projects for the benefit of the nation and subtract money from the system through taxes. Through the investment in certain activities and the taxation of other activities, the central authority shapes the economy, culture and way of life of the nation state. That is called government. It is the way things work.

Sometimes governments are monarchies, sometimes governments are dictatorships and sometimes governments are nominal democracies or republics. But it doesn’t matter. Money is always created at the center and passed downward to the citizens. If you ever run for state or federal office here in the US, it soon becomes apparent that your primary mission as a senator or congressman is not to make laws but to beg for money from the central authority on behalf of your district.

But if money is the symbolic representation of your legal right to use economic value, why is it distributed to the state or district from the outside instead of created within the state or district itself? Seem like a strange question? Can we get to the root of the question. Where does money come from? How is it made? When new money is added to the system, who adds it and who gets it? New money is obviously added to the system all the time. How much is a loaf of bread? How much was a loaf of bread ten years ago or twenty years ago?

They play the same game in every country I have ever traveled in. You can trade US dollars for the local currency on the black market or at banks or public exchanges. Many foreign currencies have lots of zeroes as governments and central banks add more and more currency to their system without increasing economic value inside their jurisdictions. This causes inflation as each individual piece of currency is worth less and less. Some governments even have to subtract zeroes from the currency because at some point it becomes ridiculous. I once paid 38,000 Zimbabwe dollars for a fast food cheese burger in Harare.

I have not yet visited a nation state that has a democratic money supply system. In my experience, there are only oligarchic systems. Money is created at the top and passed downward through the channels of the hierarchy until it eventually reaches the general public where it gets passed around. The relative cost of things in each nation state is dependent upon the amount of currency getting passed around and the availability of economic value. Behind it all is the US dollar.

The Bretton Woods conference after WWII, established the structure that essentially rules most of the world’s economic value today. Under this structure, the IMF and World Bank treat “independent” nation states in much the same way that the Federal Reserve treats the different states and communities in the U.S.. With the power to tighten or loosen the money supply and the means to direct currency flows, the central authority imposes poverty to guarantee compliant laborers and access to natural resources for multi-national corporations.

It doesn’t have to be that way. People could stop believing in the oligarchs’ money and create democratic money to pass around instead. With universal access to basic economic rights, people would have an economic incentive to work together in voluntary associations and co-ops to make their communities and the world in general a better place instead of being forced to get a “job” in order to survive.

In the last thirty years or so, the oligarchs in charge of the money supply have used the mechanism of “financial services” to direct excessive amounts of currency flow towards national security (war), fossil fuel extraction, information manipulation (propaganda) and domestic security (prisons and police). If you want to “succeed” in the modern world, those are good industries to get a “job” in. The troubling world we are living in today is largely the result of those unwise investments.  The direction of currency flow towards the above mentioned “investments” was not somehow the manifestation of the people’s democratic will.  It was the decisions of the oligarchs because they wanted to exert more control over “citizens/subjects”.

What is the difference between democratic money and oligarchic money? Democratic money is based upon a social contract between the people participating in the economic system. Oligarchic money is created by governments and corporations (banks approved by the fed) and lent with interest to the people participating in the economic system.

Democratize the money supply!

The non-violent economic revolution starts now…

This essay is not copyrighted. Please feel free to share it or send it or plagiarize it or copy and paste it or spread it to others in any way you see fit.

Thanks and have a wonderful day.

A Little Light in the Election Darkness

image

A Little Light in the Election Darkness

I was wrong. It’s feels good to admit that once in a while. The universe just gave me a dose of humility to help round out my soul. I was all wrong about the election. I thought for sure that Hillary was going to win in a landslide. Of course I did not want Hillary to win. I didn’t want Trump to win either. As most people who know me are aware, I don’t vote in Presidential elections as a matter of principle. Democracy breaks down the greater the number of participants. And I don’t see the point in voting for people rather than policies. In my opinion, it’s a great big charade. It’s a friendly competition between two teams of oligarchs to see who gets to screw over the underclass for the next four years. Since both teams of oligarchs have been steadily applying the same policies for the last thirty years or so, it really makes little difference which party wins. This country needs a non-violent economic revolution, not another ruler to love or hate on the tv screen. Nevertheless, I thought for sure Hillary and the democrats had it in the bag. How in the world did the crazy clown pull it off?

For many years I have been fascinated by the intersection of economics and politics and this year’s Presidential election is an amazing demonstration of my theories on that intersection. I was dead wrong about the result but my underlying analysis was more or less on target. I simply misunderstood one little variable and that screwed up my conclusion.

First, the basics. Aside from the 01% who rule things, and the other 01% who are not even allowed to play (incarcerated or homeless), America has two distinct economic classes. It helps to realize what class you are in because the day to day lived experience of the two classes is dramatically different. Indeed, I would suggest that the two distinct classes have such different day to day realities that they do not understand each other at all.

At this particular time in history, approximately 70% of US citizens live survival check to survival check. Their survival checks come from minimum wage jobs or part time jobs or “free lance” jobs or some minuscule government subsidy or private pension survival ration. They have less than a thousand dollars in savings, very little home equity, no stocks or bonds and very high mortgage payments or rent to keep a roof over their heads. In other words, they are one unfortunate mishap away from seriously desperate circumstances. Their day to day existence is one of anxiety and work and more anxiety and more work. They don’t have the time to research detailed articles on politics or economics because they are too busy trying to make ends meet. No doubt they are exposed to large doses of mass media and they have their favorite source of news and information but politics is not something they focus on. I call this class, “the precariate” because their economic reality is so precarious. The majority of the precariate does not usually vote. And when they do vote it is based mainly on instinct and the superficial background information provided by the mass media. They do not vote based on detailed analysis of economics or policy.

The other 30% of US citizens do not live survival check to survival check. They have decent paying jobs, money in the bank, some home equity, and a few stocks, bonds or investments. Although they too suffer through tragedy, anxiety and stress because they are slaves of the corporate organizational structure, they are not one step away from seriously desperate circumstances. They have some leisure time to read the intellectual magazines and to study detailed analyses of economics and politics. They also have time to attend protests and rallies and to participate in the political process. They don’t necessarily understand politics or economics but they have lots of information and ideas to support their misunderstanding. I call this class, “the prosperiate” because their economic reality is fairly prosperous. The overwhelming majority of the prosperiate do vote. Generally speaking, they vote for one of the two teams of oligarchs (democrats or republicans). Their intellectual magazines and detailed economic and political analyses always convinces them that the two political teams are the only “realistic” options.

Generally speaking, it is the prosperiate who decide elections in the US because they are the ones that vote. They believe they are being good citizens by participating in a governmental process. Some people even get very patriotic and proud about it. But, in reality, their individual votes are statistically irrelevant and their opinions and analyses are ignored by the oligarchs. For the most part, the prosperiate vote is divided equally between the Democrats and Republicans with a little fluidity depending upon circumstances on the ground. The single most important variable that controls the outcome of elections is the day to day economic reality of the prosperiate.

I thought for sure that Hillary and the Democrats were going to win in a landslide this year because the facts on the ground are that Barack Obama and the Democrats have been quite good economically for the prosperiate. The economic world was on shaky ground even for the prosperiate at the end of George Bush’s term. The Republican team had fucked things up so bad that Capitalism itself was on the ropes. As such, Barack Obama had a unique opportunity to transform things. But he didn’t transform things. Instead, he just proved himself to be a remarkably good manager of the capitalist system. His team of bankers and Wall Street insiders got the money flowing again. If you are a member of the prosperiate, then you are probably aware of this economic reality. Life is way better at the end of Barack Obama’s term than it was at the end of George Bush’s. If you combine this truth with the fact that the Republican candidate presented himself as a mysoginistic, racist asshole, it seemed obvious to me that Hillary Clinton and the Democrats would win in a landslide. But I was wrong.

The precariate doesn’t usually decide elections because the precariate don’t usually vote very much. They understand intuitively that the process is bullshit and they can’t be bothered wasting their time. Every once in a while, however, a particularly persuasive orator with the right marketing plan will con the precariate into participation. I will call this, the rock star effect.
Ronnie Reagan was probably a rock star but I was too young to be aware of it. The first rock star candidate that I witnessed was Barack Obama in 2008. Since ethnic minorities make up a high percentage of the non-voting precariate, he had a unique advantage in convincing them to play in the election game. By 2012, of course, the jig was up. The precariate was painfully aware of the fact that Obama and the Democrats were full of shit and they went back to their non-voting well justified cynicism. They did not turn around and vote for Republicans, they just did not vote at all. Obama won in 2012 by winning the votes of the prosperiate.

This is the thing that baffles me. Most but not all of my regular social contacts are members of the prosperiate. They still do not seem to believe that the big con happened because they did not really have to suffer the consequences. Indeed, in some respects, they were secondary, minor beneficiaries of it. The precariate, however, is painfully aware of the consequences even if they don’t understand exactly how it happened. What is the economic truth?

Financial engineering. In the last eight years, the oligarchs engineered the largest transfer of real world wealth upward from the lower classes to the oligarchs in the history of the world. Most of the prosperiate class was lucky enough to get their hands on some of that wealth as it passed its way upward so they are still doing pretty good. But a significant percentage of the prosperiate class fell into the precariate class and the precariate class as a whole got slammed.

I don’t blame Obama personally. He was merely the smiling front man. The brain trust at Goldman Sachs probably came up with the concept. Republicans and democrats were both in on it but it was a democratic administration that implemented it. The primary mechanisms they used to pull this maneuver off included TARP, bank bailouts and quantitative easing. They also did not prosecute bankers for obvious fraud. But this is not the place for a detailed analysis of their little economic magic trick. If you have the time to research politics and economics you can probably figure it out. My point is a simple one. The prosperiate class seems blissfully unaware that the magic trick happened. At most they might mention it as one issue among many. But the precariate class has to live with its consequences in their day to day economic reality… Full time “jobs” are now part time “jobs”. The “jobs” available are minimum wage part time jobs in the service sector. The cost of shelter is going through the roof. The only food that is affordable is chemically laden genetically modified corporate garbage. It now costs money to drink water. Indeed, it now costs money to do anything and money is just not available. In other words, day to day economic reality for the precariate class really really sucks. They may not know how or why the system has fucked them over but they do know that it has.

Which is why I assumed that the precariate would not vote. After all, a vote is an affirmation of the system. A republican is just the same as a democrat. Only a rock star conman could convince the precariate to go out and participate in the election game. Which is why I was wrong about the election. I didn’t think Trump was a rock star conman. I thought he was an absurd clown and obvious conman. I even thought he and Hillary were in on it together. He was there to make the opposition look bad so that Hillary could generate momentum for her more aggressive war in Syria. Apparently, the Trumpster was a much better con man than I gave him credit for. The democrats took the bait and responded to his rather unusual candidacy in the stupidest way ever.

In retrospect, it seems obvious to me that Hillary lost the election the day she referred to Trump’s supporters as “a basket of deplorables”. And it wasn’t just her, it was the entire Democratic campaign. They did not debate, discuss, and intelligently criticize candidate Trump’s various policy proposals, instead they insulted the citizens who were “stupid” enough to vote for him. If you have social media or you watch television you were exposed to the barrage of memes and insults. Fascists, nazis, racists, bigots, crackers, white trash, losers, meth heads, stupid people, morons. They would capture an image of the most absurd example of a Trump supporter doing something stupid and splash it all over the news feed. Half of them were probably actors. It all makes perfect sense to me now. The democrats had a lock on the people who usually vote. Donald Trump was entertaining to people who don’t vote. They probably would have just laughed at Trump’s obnoxious character and stayed home like they usually do until the Democrats started egging them on. When the entire media and political establishment joined in the pile on against Trump, a tidal wave of condescending was directed towards his supporters. Action therefore reaction. The entire establishment was telling them not to vote for this guy. Their attitude is; fuck the establishment. So, of course, they voted for him. In other words, President Trumpster is Karmic Payback to Democrats for pissing on the precariate class.

But alas my dear friends who are Democrats, things are not as bad as it seems on this time of election darkness. This was not a cout de tat. The Donald is not a Dictator. Those scary people you saw on television and in Facebook memes are not taking over the government. Team Republican of the oligarchs just beat out team Democrat in a marketing contest. The well-mannered, smooth talking, ethnic minority figurehead is about to be replaced by a rude, obnoxious, clown figurehead. The oligarchs will move a few seats around and the system and the Empire will continue. If you voted for Hillary, you are probably a member of the prosperiate class. Since team republican generally pursues the same economic policies as team Democrat and those policies sort of benefit the prosperiate, your life will probably continue pretty much the same as it is now. It may even get a little bit better. Hopefully, though, with an obnoxious clown on the nightly news every night, you will be inspired to learn about and criticize the dreadful things your government does to others for the sake of your economic benefit. The massacre in and wholesale destruction of the once prosperous nation state of Libya comes to mind. Not to mention the economic warfare waged against your fellow citizens through the aforementioned magic trick.

So anyway, I am finding myself strangely optimistic in the face of the Trumpster’s presidency. Not because I think he will adopt good policy. There is no such thing as good policy in a capitalist empire. No doubt about it, the clown is going to kick the precariate constituency that put him in office right in the head just like Obama did to his precariate constituency. They will probably have a good laugh about it during their Oval Office meeting. Obummer did it as soon as he named his Goldman Sachs cabinet and I will bet you dollars to donuts that the Trumpster names a bunch of old hands from team republican to run his show as well. After all, it is not as if the clown has a plan to run the government. The Trumpster dumpster full of wacky policy ideas he tossed out during the campaign was not even a coherent ideology. Perhaps he will shut down the TPP and improve relations with Russia. That would be good. But I won’t hold my breath.

I’m optimistic about the Trumpster’s reign because I believe his presence will inspire people to act in opposition to empire. I know the media is trying to spin the election result as some sort of manifestation of racism, misogyny and lurking cultural backwardness. But the media is full of shit with a not so hidden agenda. They are trying to incite a culture/race war in order to fend off an economic revolution that is becoming more and more possible all the time. The election of the Trumpster clown to the highest office was a rejection of the globalized capitalist economic system, it was not the choosing of a race-based mysoginist tyrant. And when the Trumpster clown governs just like other republicans, the precariate who put him in office will reject him too.

That’s right, the times ahead look interesting and entertaining as well. Yeah, I know, my democratic friends who are members of the prosperiate are afraid of real revolution. What can I suggest to appease their fear? Try not to worry too much because it probably won’t happen. There is at least a 30% chance that the BS wing of the Democratic Party will co-opt the revolution with a promise of cookie crumbs for the precariate and Capitalism will continue on it’s merry way until it destroys the planet in a climate meltdown or nuclear conflagration. There is also probably a 30 % chance, the Trumpster and his republican team will save capitalism by providing the precariate with decent jobs in the ever growing “homeland security” and “world conquest” industries. How many serfs does it take to build a wall? In which case, Capitalism will continue on it’s merry way until it destroys the planet in a climate meltdown or nuclear conflagration.

That leaves about a 40% chance for economic revolution. It’s not quite probable but it is possible. I will takes those odds. Way better than years passed. I guess it is also possible that the revolution will be violent but it certainly doesn’t have to be. When the European descendants in the precariate become disillusioned with their clown President, the situation will be ripe. The mass media is trying to ignite a culture war between the two sides of the precariate in order to distract them from focusing on the Oligarchs. Don’t feed the media’s fire. Reach out to the precariate no matter what their race or how “stupid” their superficial politics. Love trumps hate. Try to empathize with the desperation a broken economic system has imposed upon them. They were so desperate, in fact, that they voted for a clown. If the opposite sides of the precariate culture war can unify to fight for their common economic interests, the oligarchs will lose. All they need is a plan or theory or concept to get behind.

Not Capitalism
Not Socialism
Organic economics
Reverse financial engineering
DEMOCRATIZE THE MONEY SUPPLY
Quantitative ease the precariate class!
Viva la Revolution

And have a very wonderful day.

This essay is not copyrighted. Please feel free to share it with anyone and everyone.

A Fairly Simple Plan

I sometimes think that it would be fun and useful to teach a class about how to engineer a non-violent economic revolution. You hear a lot of talk about such things but no one out there in mass media world ever comes out with a plan or a strategy. Everybody gets distracted by the election show and nobody ever focuses on the fundamentals. Well, I do have a plan or strategy. Unfortunately, I also have a fairly significant case of social anxiety. I can medicate my social anxiety with heavy doses of alcohol but I don’t like the way alcohol makes my body feel. Am I willing to sacrifice my health and sanity for the sake of the revolution? Probably not. I would rather build stone walls.

Anyway, if I ever did teach the class, it would involve about 20 detailed discussions of inter-related topics. The syllabus or overview for the theoretical class on non-violent economic revolution is presented here. All you political revolutionaries out there who just got burned again by the election game need something to do. Well, here you go.

A Fairly Simple Plan

Non-violent economic revolution? How to do it? It’s really not that complicated. It won’t be easy to implement but the basic steps to follow are fairly straightforward and understandable.

First, create a not-for-profit corporation that is legally capable of soliciting tax deductible donations to advocate on behalf of the public welfare. I believe it is section 501 (c) of the IRS code that defines such organizations but I’m not sure. Wanted; a few people with good credit to serve as board members and a couple of revolutionaries to file the paperwork and set up official legal bank accounts.

Second, explain the concept of dynamic economics or organic economics (I don’t know what name is better) such that it is easy to understand. The basic idea unifies theoretical communism and theoretical capitalism as the yin and yang of economic impulses and creates a system that utilizes the communal side of human nature and the individual side of human nature. The purpose of the not-for-profit is to implement the concept and donations are collected toward that end from anyone who is interested in the “revolution”.

Third, market the “concept” and collect donations. This is the hard part. I hate marketing and I have social anxiety so someone else will have to do this part. Wanted; good speakers with charisma to “sell” the “revolution.”

Fourth, accumulate money in a centralized account because a fairly large amount is necessary as backing to implement the plan. The total amount collected should always be public knowledge. Indeed, the growth in the size of the account could be part of the marketing plan.

Fifth, define the territory within which you want to implement the concept. The fundamental problem with the U.S. economic system is a centralized oligarchic money system. We wish to transform that not by taking over the large unruly linear money system that presently exists but by creating an alternative localized dynamic money system that works. A main difference between the present economic system and the proposed economic system is that the present system is dependent upon growth/expansion/conquest/imperialism while a dynamic system works within fixed boundaries or established parameters. I don’t know the optimum size of a territory for an independent dynamic currency system. I definitely think the United States is way too big. But perhaps a state is about right. The smaller the state the better. Perhaps Hawaii or Vermont will take the concept and run with it. I don’t know. But, just for the sake of discussion, I am going to localize even smaller. For the last twenty years, I have lived back and forth between Delaware and Otsego counties in upstate NY. I am going to combine those two counties into a single territory for purposes of creating a theoretical currency union.

Six, name the territory. I’m going to call my new theoretical territory “Paradise” because, well, I like metaphors and usually I really think it is Paradise to live here.

Seven, choose a very large number to represent the total theoretical economic value of “Paradise”. A billion? A trillion? The number is arbitrary (a democratic choice?). I don’t know. You want a number high enough so that it can be divided into a practical number of useable pieces of currency (pieces of paradise or pps).

Eight, set about the long and difficult task of convincing people and teaching people to price economic value created locally in theoretical pps as well as dollars. If all of Paradise is worth a Trillion pps, how much to rent that apartment in Oneonta? Please note that most shelter, food, healthcare and education is created and provided locally.

Nine, after you have accumulated enough dollars as backing and educated the community about alternative pricing, introduce the new currency that operates on dynamic democratic principles instead of linear oligarchic principles. This is the stage at which the plan or revolution will run head first into the laws of Empire. According to the Constitution, only the US Federal Government can issue money or create currency. But in reality, private corporations (banks) create money. This is what the revolution is all about. Democracy or Oligarchy. Is money a thing that they control? Or is money the symbolical representation of your legal right to use economic resources in the community where you live? Does money come from the agreement of the people or from the power of the far away masters? I would suggest that the best strategy for overcoming the constitutional hurdles and legal challenges here would be to argue that the currency you are introducing is not really currency. It is something else because it operates on different principles. Don’t worry Feds, it’s not real money, it’s only a game we are playing. These are just game pieces. Come on, we call them pps for pieces of paradise. You can’t take this seriously as a threat to Empire?

Ten, in order to introduce the currency, you have to convince a large number of people who live within the geographic parameters to “play the game” or participate in the new economic system. All people who play agree to accept pps for payment for labor or local good or service provided to other game players. All people who play receive a monthly investment of pps equivalent to the fair market value of food, shelter, education and basic healthcare in Paradise. In exchange for the guaranteed monthly investment of pps, all the game players agree to give 50% of everything they earn back to Paradise. It is important to note that game players are not restricted to using and accepting only pps. They can use dollars or rubles or euros or yen or any other currency. But everything they earn in whatever currency, half of it they give back to Paradise. It’s a good thing for Paradise if it has a basket of currencies in its reserve account rather than just US dollars. Theoretically, game players will do so willingly because they like receiving the guaranteed monthly investment and they like making sure everyone in their community receives their guaranteed monthly investment as well.

If all goes according to plan, at some point, the system should become self-sustaining. In other words, the pps going out through investment are equal to the pps coming in through taxes. When the system runs a surplus, the extra can be used to fund community projects. When the system runs in the negative, you can create more currency to achieve balance.

Theoretically, if the geographic area within the parameters of Paradise has the economic capacity to provide all the people living there with food, shelter, education and basic healthcare (it does), the system should become self-sustaining. People could still use dollars, of course, but they wouldn’t have to. The new money system would run parallel to the old and people could choose which game they would rather play.

For a while, of course, everyone would play both games. They would use both dollars and pps in their everyday lives. Eventually, however, the revolution will have to take the next step. Revolutionaries will have to make a moral choice of conscience. Do you want to trade in the blood soaked dollars of the Empire or peaceful pieces of Paradise?

The reality is, the revolution can only succeed if the people stop using the oligarchs money. In the modern world, this is not practical. If we created an alternative dynamic money supply system, it would be possible. Hopefully, other currency unions will sprout up across the country as well and peaceful currencies will trade with each other. Once enough people stop believing the oligarchs illusion, Paradise is possible. In the meantime, buy local and try to keep your transactions off the big computer (use cash or barter).

That’s about it. The revolution in a nutshell. Good luck implementing it. I have stonewalls to build and a toddler to chase after. Give me a shout if you have any questions.

The revolution is not copyrighted. Please feel free to share it with anyone and everyone.

Revolution 101

image

image

REVOLUTION 101.

Don’t get burned again.

Democratize the money supply. Until you do, all the elections in the world won’t make a damn bit of difference.

You are a data point in a marketing algorithm not a citizen participating in an election. Politicians work for their financial backers, not the voters. Voters are just the customers buying the crap the politicians are selling.

Remember Barack Obama, the peace candidate, who has now bombed 7 countries.  Remember George W. Bush, the “compassionate conservative,” that opposed “nation building” who then tried to “re-build Iraq” after he destroyed it. Remember Billy Clinton, the “liberal democrat”, who transformed social services into mass incarceration and let loose the vultures of finance capital onto the carcass of the US economic system. Remember the other Bush who wanted us to read his lips and Ronnie who opposed big government and gave us the largest government expansion ever.

So now Bernie is selling socialism that is not really socialism. In the spectacle of propaganda that is the US election performance, he is playing the extreme left character to counter balance the extreme right character of Donald Trump so that Hillary seems the rational, wise, compromise middle when they crown her queen. If Bernie ever did win, his economic plans would not get through Congress and socialism would take the blame for the next big crash. The important thing about Bernie is, he convinces a whole lot of people that they have a say in the process. Many of these people probably just about gave up after the travesty of Obama. But good ol’ Bernie has them believing again. What does he have them believing in? The empire? In the control of a wise and compassionate man, the power of the empire can be used for good…

I don’t believe in the empire. I oppose the empire. I believe in the decentralization of power structures and the localization of economies. The US empire should immediately withdraw its military and all of its fossil fuel consuming aggressively postured horrible weapons systems from their threatening positions around the world. And until they do, I’m certainly not going into a little booth to pull a lever and pretend that the people responsible for such madness represent me. I don’t care how good their healthcare plan is. That’s what I believe.

As such, I don’t vote in Presidential elections. This country and the world needs a political and economic revolution. Not another figure head sitting atop the same broken political/economic system. The revolution I’m talking about is conceptual and practical and non-violent. We have to replace a linear mechanical economic system with a dynamic organic one. A system that thrives on continuous war must be replaced by one that encourages peace. That may seem like a rather complicated maneuver but it is possible. It’s not going to happen at the voting booth though. The whole voting game is a distraction. But it can happen. All we have to do to make it happen is teach people the truth about how money functions and then democratize the money supply.

I’m serious, money is the tool the oligarchy uses to enslave us. The only way to free ourselves from their oppression is to change the way the money game is played.

What is money? We are taught to believe that money is a thing. Like a chunk of silver or gold that you possess and trade with others for what they possess. The more chunks you collect, the wealthier you are. But money is not a thing. Money is not real. Money is the symbolic representation of your legal right to use economic value within the jurisdiction of the government that issues the money. Understand. Money is your legal right to do stuff. Without money, you can’t do shit without getting arrested. You hear a lot of propaganda about government handouts and welfare queens and lazy people wanting free stuff. But the truth is, what you are talking about is the basic human right of all citizens to interact with their environment. What kind of a bizarre culture gets all excited and enthused about the right to own a gun but never ever talks about the RIGHT to food and shelter?

Next question; who controls the money supply? Is it democratic or oligarchic? When new money is added to the system, who gets it… where does it go? Do you personally have an open credit line with the Federal Reserve Bank? Of course not. In the last several years, the Federal Reserve has added over 4 trillion dollars to the economic system through a process called quantitative easing. Did you get quantitatively eased? Maybe. The money was used to add liquidity to the stock market and the market blew up like a balloon. If you have made money in the ever rising stock market in recent years, then you did effectively get quantitatively eased. Some people got eased more than others because that is the way the system is designed. It is called trickle down economics…. Capitalism…. Neoliberalism… A rose by any other name. The four trillion dollars was not distributed democratically among the citizens, it was given to large corporations and banks and hedge funds. They were supposed to pass it down through the markets to investors and employees and customers and citizens. And they did, sort of, a little bit.

The fundamentals of money supply are fairly easy to understand but rather difficult to apply. Every jurisdiction has an evolving amount of economic value available. Some value gets used up (food is eaten) and new value is added (food grows). The challenge of money supply is making sure the amount of currency in circulation corresponds to the amount of economic value available. If there is too much money in the system and not enough economic value you will have inflation. In other words, you will need more and more money to use comparatively less economic value. If there is not enough money in the system, the opposite happens. Economic value that is available gets wasted because no one can afford to use it. It is the job of the money supplier to find the perfect balance between the two situations. It is important to understand that money is a tool or mechanism that is used to manage underlying economic value. Money itself has very little real economic value (you can’t eat it but at least paper money will burn to keep you warm, the dots on the computer screen won’t even do that.)

How much is a loaf of bread? How much was a loaf of bread ten years ago? I can remember when a millionaire was considered incredibly wealthy. I have traveled in countries with a whole lot of zeroes on their money. When I was in Zimbabwe once, the exchange rate wasp 5000 to 1 when I arrived and 11,000 to 1 when I left two weeks later. After a while, the extra zeroes no longer mean anything. Chop them off the end or add them to the front. The money itself is not real. It is merely a symbol of your legal rights to use economic value. Since a human being cannot exist within modern society without using economic value, money is really a symbol of your legal right to exist.

Think about that for a while. And then think about all the different prongs of the empire that citizens have to crawl before in order to get enough currency to exist. Corporate slave wages, Unemployment, welfare, social security, disability…. Small Businesses have the same problem… they have to beg for grants or loans from their far away masters. Employees get the trickle down that their bosses had to beg for. Don’t you see. The problem is the money supply. When new money is added to the system, it is given to the wealthy. Politicians tend to argue a lot about the re-distribution of wealth. But what about the distribution of wealth in the first place? We presently have quite literally a trickle down money supply system. The revolution I’m talking about would replace that with a bubble up or bottom up money supply system.

Democratize the money supply. It’s that simple. The revolution is not complicated. It is a straightforward concept. A single demand. Democratize the money supply.

Intellectuals and pundits who theorize about such things sometimes refer to the concept of basic income. Another metaphor one hears from the propaganda box is the social safety net. But such metaphors tend to put the person who receives money into the role of loser or victim who must rely on charity rather than into the role of human who has a right to exist and interact with the environment where they live. In other words, we must replace the concept of welfare with the concept of investment.

Get rid of all the multi pronged social service bureaucracies and replace them with a money supply system that makes sense. All citizens receive the same package of economic rights through a monthly investment from the central bank or government. What is the fair market value of food, shelter, basic healthcare and education? In exchange for the monthly investment package, the citizens agree to pay in taxes 50% of everything they earn by participating in the free market back to the central bank or government. Every citizen gets the same deal. Dynamic economics. The monthly package of economic rights through an investment and the 50% tax on everything they earn. Many people will probably pay back more than they receive, some people will break even and some will probably just live off the monthly investment and not earn anything in the free market. But that is okay. In a world of over consumption, an economic system that does not punish people for choosing to live simply is a good thing. The important thing is that the money continually flows through the system; back and forth; dynamically. From central bank to citizens in monthly investments and from citizens back to the government in the form of taxes. It’s a contract; an agreement that all citizens agree to and all citizens benefit from.

So that’s it in a nut shell. The Revolution. Money or currency flows in a cycle that all citizens have access to instead of trickled downward to the lowly from the powers above.

The Empire will oppose it with the full force of propaganda and maybe even violence because the oligarchs who control the Empire understand the truth about bargaining position and the myth of a free market. The corporate business model is dependent upon a “slave” market… desperate people who will do what they are told because they desperately need money to survive. If citizens have economic rights they have bargaining position. They have the ability to not put up with bullshit from asshole bosses. Who is going to work at Walmart if they don’t have to? The US military is dependent on financial slaves as well. That’s why recruiters target poverty zones. A promising career in the military is a way to escape desperate poverty. If all citizens have economic rights, they wouldn’t be so eager to serve in Imperial wars. No doubt, brave volunteers would defend the homeland against invaders but that’s a whole different thing than going overseas to kill foreigners because it’s a good job or career. The US has not fought a defensive war in my lifetime. They are always on offense.

That’s because we have a linear mechanical economic system that requires continual growth to thrive. The clearest way to add economic value (growth) to a government’s jurisdiction is to take control or conquer the economic value of another jurisdiction. Does the economic system cause imperialism and continuous war or is it merely used as a cover story to explain human behavior? If we change the economic system and remove the underlying incentive for war can we stop lots of wars from happening. I don’t know. But it’s worth a shot.

In the natural world, energy (growth) and entropy (distribution) are always engaged in a dynamic balance. Life is what manifests in between them. The US economic system is fundamentally flawed on the entropy side. If we don’t fix it soon, the whole thing will go down in flames.

I believe in real free markets… not fake ones. A market can’t be free unless all the participants have basic economic rights. The right to interact with the environment and provide for your own needs is really the most essential human right. The government restricts that right by dividing the environment into “owned” pieces and enforcing laws that require payment of currency to owners for the use of the pieces. Accordingly, the government must provide enough currency to each citizen so that they can provide for their basic needs or the government violates the most essential human right and thereby renders itself illegitimate. I want to live in a world where empowered citizens seek and create work that inspires and interests them. I don’t want to live in a world where desperate people have to beg for jobs from corporate masters. In other words, I want a non-violent economic revolution. Would you like to join the cause?

The revolution is not copyrighted, please feel free to share it with anyone and everyone.